Neighborhood racial income inequality and cognitive health.

INTRODUCTION: Neighborhood socioeconomic status (SES) has been linked to dementia, but the distribution of SES within a neighborhood may also matter. METHODS: Data from 460 (47% Black, 46% White) older adults from the Michigan Cognitive Aging Project were linked to census tract-level data from the National Neighborhood Data Archive (NaNDA). Neighborhood SES included two composites reflecting disadvantage and affluence. Neighborhood racial income inequality was the ratio of median incomes for White versus Black residents. Generalized estimating equations examined associations between neighborhood factors and cognitive domains. RESULTS: Neighborhood racial income inequality was uniquely associated with worse cognitive health, and these associations did not differ by participant race. Neighborhood disadvantage was only associated with worse cognitive health among Black participants. DISCUSSION: Both the level and racial distribution of SES within a neighborhood may be relevant for dementia risk. Racial differences in the level and impact of neighborhood SES contribute to dementia inequalities. HIGHLIGHTS: Black participants lived in neighborhoods with lower socioeconomic status (SES) than White participants, on average. Neighborhood SES and racial income inequality were associated with worse cognition. Effects of neighborhood racial income inequality did not differ across racial groups. Effects of neighborhood SES were only evident among Black participants.

Perspectives From Black and White Participants and Care Partners on Return of Amyloid and Tau PET Imaging and Other Research Results.

PURPOSE: Alzheimer disease (AD) biomarker testing is now common in research and approaching clinical translation. Disclosure protocols must be informed by diverse participants' perspectives on if/how the information would be useful. METHODS: This study utilized semistructured interviews assessing interest in receiving positron emission tomography (PET) amyloid and tau results, as well as perceived risks and benefits of hypothetical PET disclosure as a function of race and participant diagnosis. PARTICIPANTS: Participants [39% Black; 61% White; Mage =74.28 (5.98)] included 57 adults diagnosed as either cognitively healthy (58%) or with mild cognitive impairment (42%) and their respective care partners [33% Black; 67% White; Mage =66.93 (10.92)]. RESULTS: Most dyads endorsed strong interest in PET results (82.5% of both participants and partners) regardless of race or diagnosis. Black care partners were less interested in receiving the participant's results than White care partners ( χ2(4) =8.31, P =0.047). Reasons for disclosure were diverse and highly personalized, including access to treatments or clinical trials (23.2% participants; 29.8% partners), advance planning (14.3% participants; 17.5% partners), and improved health knowledge (12.5% participants; 15.8% partners). In contrast, over 80% of respondents denied any risks of disclosure. DISCUSSION: Results suggest that predisclosure education, decisional capacity assessment, and a flexible disclosure approach are needed.